Earlier this week, the organization I head, America’s Voice, released a new report entitled, "The Power of the Latino Vote in America: They Tipped Elections in 2008; Where Will they be in 2010?"
The detailed findings highlight the many potential benefits – and potential perils – for both major political parties. The report tracks 40 races for 2010 in 12 states—29 U.S. House races, 8 U.S. Senate races and 3 gubernatorial races—and shows that Latino voter turn out as well as the candidates’ positions on immigration reform will a huge impact on the outcomes.
One finding is that Democrats have to deliver on their promises of change – on the economy and immigration – or risk a depressed base. To wit, just last week Mark DiCamillo of the highly-regarded Field Poll in California found that Senator Barbara Boxer's reelection could be in serious jeopardy if Latino turnout is low this November.
Republicans also face a steep challenge when it comes to Latino voters, and we are seeing this play out as a virtual war within the party on immigration.
The way immigration has been handled by most Republicans has badly damaged the GOP brand. And while immigration is not the number one issue for most Latino voters, it is a defining issue. So much so that an overwhelming 87% of respondents in a 2009 Bendixen poll said they would not consider voting for a candidate who was in favor of forcing most of the undocumented population to leave the country and only 23% trusted congressional Republicans to “do the right thing on the immigration issue.”
More recently, the opening night of the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville last weekend featured none other than former GOP presidential candidate Tom Tancredo, who served five terms in Congress. He used the podium to espouse the vehemently anti-immigrant views that many Latinos associate with Republicans:
The opening-night speaker at first ever National Tea Party Convention ripped into President Obama, Sen. John McCain and "the cult of multiculturalism," asserting that Obama was elected because "we do not have a civics, literacy test before people can vote in this country."
The speaker, former Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., told about 600 delegates in a Nashville, Tenn., ballroom that in the 2008 election, America "put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House ... Barack Hussein Obama."
Tancredo then joined anti-immigration activist Roy Beck for an immigrant-bashing breakout session, focused on spreading the kind of lies about immigrants that would make Lou Dobbs proud:
Roy Beck, the executive director of Numbers USA, made the case that stopping illegal immigration was the key to solving most of America’s economic problems. “We imported the health care crisis!” said Beck. “Every year we import one to one and a half million immigrants, and most of them go on welfare.”
Look, anyone with half a brain knows that the collapse of the economy had more to do with the “masters of the universe” on Wall Street and in Washington than the people who clean their offices. And so-called experts such as Beck know better than most that immigrants tend to be hard-working family people who eschew welfare when possible (not to mention undocumented immigrants don’t qualify for welfare and legal residents have to pay taxes for a decade before becoming eligible for most benefits).
Politically, this attempt to “death panel” immigrants is just the sort of pandering by GOP luminaries that ends up further alienating recent citizens and Latino families who just happen to constitute the fastest-growing voting demographic in our nation.
Still, all is not lost for the GOP. As the San Francisco Chronicle article on our Latino Voters report pointed out, smart Republicans still have a chance to yank their party back from the nativists. Just five years ago, many socially conservative Hispanics – especially naturalized immigrants –supported President Bush in 2004 after the Bush-Rove team made it a priority to connect with these voters on both values and immigration.
The point is this: both parties should watch this dynamic very closely. Latino voters are no done deal.
Unbeknownst to most of the chattering class, the 2008 presidential race saw both candidates running Spanish-language ads focusing on immigration reform. Candidates Obama and McCain each tried to portray the other as unreliable on the issue of comprehensive immigration reform. Both campaigns understood that for the Republican candidate to win the presidency, he had to win 40% of the nationwide Latino vote. McCain won 31%.
Let’s fast forward to today. According to a 2009 interview, Republican Mitt Romney now “believes that one way to attract more minorities to the GOP is to pass immigration reform before the next election, saying the issue becomes demagogued by both parties on the campaign trail."
Newt Gingrich, who considers himself a “top prospect” for 2012, has already set up a Spanish-speaking website, titled The Americano. No, it’s not a hot beverage. The site includes a description of its “principles” for immigration, which are a far cry from standard Tea Party fare. Today, The Americano featured our report with the headline: A Segment of the Latino Electorate is Clearly Up for Grabs in 2010. (Unfortunately, the post speculates its way out of actually dealing with comprehensive immigration reform...talk about split personality)
That brings us to Sarah Palin, who was the keynote speaker at the Tea Party convention. Unlike Tancredo, Palin never mentioned immigrants. And just a couple weeks ago, she was making friendly sounds on immigration.
Let’s be clear: none of these Republican presidential hopefuls are trustworthy on workable immigration reform nor are they where they need to be to get right on the issue. What’s noteworthy is that their trajectory demonstrates their understanding that immigrant-bashing has hurt the party and that that they have to go in a better direction to be viable in 2012. With an expanded Latino electorate, the Republican threshold may even be higher than 40%.
And then there’s the rising generation of Republicans who have an entirely different worldview. Meghan McCain has become the de facto spokesperson for that group, and she blasted Tancredo’s immigrant bashing during an appearance on The View. Check out the video (at Huffington Post). You’ll see her read Tancredo’s comments and charge him with “innate racism.”
McCain argues:
I think it’s why young people are turned off by this movement. And, I’m sorry, revolutions start with young people not with 65-year old people talking about literacy tests and people who can’t say the word “vote” in English. It’s ridiculous.
She’s right. It is ridiculous.
Too bad too many Republicans are allowing such wingnuts to define the party. And too bad too many Democrats are so scared of the same wingnuts.
Follow Frank Sharry on Twitter: www.twitter.com/americasvoice
Mickey Kaus: Why I Filed to Run for U.S. Senate
I have no special beef with the incumbent, Senator Boxer. She is a state-of-the-art Democrat. But to be "state-of-the-art" in our party is not such a good thing anymore.
The Right would agree to amnesty for those here illegally and the Left would agree to enforce laws against employing illegal immigrants.
After the law passed, the Left turned around fought every enforcement measure to completely eliminate employer sanctions.
So lets finish implementing our current Immigration Reform (Simpson-Mazzoli) and enforce “no-match” letters and require E-Verify for a while and be fair.
The Left, or Progressives today, need to show some good faith and keep their promises from Simpson-Mazzoli act. Enforce our current law for a while before you ask the American people to once again trust you when you say your willing to actually do any of the enforcement that will be part of any new Immigration Reform.
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Verify
http://www.ssa.gov/employer/noMatchNotices.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Reform_and_Control_Act_of_1986
Im sorry, fellow Repubs, but it's time to (a) legalize the current illegals who have been here at least 5 years and (2) place a moratorium on ALL immigration until the whole thing shakes out. Face it, fellow Americans, 20 million people are NEVER going to get booted out, ainta gonna happen. Time to F'-in deal with it. Their kids can't even get driver's licenses...kids who've never even BEEN to their home countries.
We already tried that. It has been a disaster.
That’s what Simpson-Mazzoli did, you need to read it. Enforce the law under Simpson-Mazzoli FIRST, then maybe we believe you when you say “immigrants who come in the future do so legally”. Make E-Verify mandatory and enforce Social Security Administration “no match” letters for current employees for a few years before you try any new amnesty!
http://www.ssa.gov/employer/noMatchNotices.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Verify
"The latest government data (for the 2008 year) show that 53 percent of all households headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) with one or more children under age 18 used at least one welfare program that year."
So he did not lie. You saying he lied is a lie.
So, who is the liar, Frank?
If you can't make your case honestly, then you have no case. Care to retract your assertion about Mr. Beck?
There is the sweatshop faction that wants to have open borders (just as do the progressives).
They want the US to be more of a feudalistic society of impoverished peasants. The progressives aren't too keen on that but are willing to use the American middle class as collateral damage in order to destroy the market economy.
The other faction of Republicans believe we are better off having strict curbs on immigration so that Americans can have some hope of economic opportunity.
The sweatshop/progressive coalition has a lot of support among the Ruling Class and the rich, but its only grassroots support is among lefto-anarchists and anti-government wackos.
NOWHERE
You hide behind "workers rights" to attack immigrants. But you had no problem supporting right-to-work (English translation: right-to-work-FOR-FREE) laws in the eighties.
Americans during a great economy realized that illegal immigration was wrong and these
job and sovereignty thieves were stealing jobs from American citizens and costing us billions having their anchor babies and committing crimes in the U.S.
Illegal aliens have never been scapegoats, they are simply illegal and illegally invading our
country.
The U.S. has always been good to true legal immigrants.
Fred do you hire illegals or is your family here illegally?
Decades ago, Chinese already realized that population growth and immigration would impede its economic success. The Chinese leaders also realize that population growth would worsen global warming. When will Americans realize the urgent need to curb teen pregnancies totaling 750,000 a year nationwidee, encourage small families and drastically reduce immigration, both legal and illegal?
Many naive promoters of open borders have lost their jobs. Those who still are employed better wake up and not blindly or selfishly promote ever-increasing immigration.
Yeh Ling-Ling
Alliance for a Sustainable USA
Those republican need to get an education on fairness and honesty.
It's not "racist" to support the rule of law.
Americans already went through a ONE-TIME-AMNESTY! And it was a serious flop.
Nothing has changed as we are still being invaded and the amnesty invaders brought
in many of their relatives here shocking even the Congress with their numbers.
We don't not need another amnesty and we Americans were promised the last one would
be the only one.
We are placing their feet to the fire. NO MORE AMNESTY.
not even the most liberal plan does that. It makes no sense. At most, some of the people here illegally will have a very hard path to become legal residents, probably with only a temporary work permit, and only a few ones will be allowed to become permanent residents, and eventually, in a decade or so, if ever, citizens.